Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP) Seminar Series 2009

1. Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP) Seminar Series 2009 Lessons Learned from Conducting Youth Assessments

2. Introduction to Youth Assessments Cornelia Janke

3. Why is it helpful to do a youth assessment? • Youth ‘story’ is often hidden • Youth story best told through a targeted though ‘layered’ inquiry

4. What are the general characteristics of a youth assessment? Typically consist of: • preliminary document review • in-country field inquiry • detailed assessment report and recommendations • program design, redesign (if requested) • process can take 3-6 weeks

5. What are the general characteristics of a youth assessment? Usually involve local and international specialists who understand youth from lenses like: • youth development • education and training • labor demand • policy • organizational capacity development • assessment • conflict (in some cases)

6. What are the general characteristics of a youth assessment? Stakeholders usually include: • youth from a range of subgroups • USAID mission representatives • local gov’t representatives • local and int’l NGO representatives • private sector—local and international • international donors • local civil society (advocacy) groups

7. Involving Youth: Gathering data/information from and with youth Alejandra Bonifaz Somalia and Democratic Republic of the Congo

8. Inductive approaches (focus groups)

9. Scheduling logistics Assessment design WITH youth:As team members Analysis / conclusions Data/info gathering

10. Requirements Training: orientation, data collection methodologies, modeling, practicing, feedback, support Careful selection of young team members Involvement from the beginning stages

11. Why bother? Payoffs… • Contextualized tools • Up-to-date information • Less threatening environment (youth-to-youth) • Access to hard-to-reach youth groups • Well positioned to add value to the analysis • Local capacity building • Better tools & more accurate (“real”) information • Better targeting • More relevant analysis • Better follow-up

12. Effectively targeting at-risk sub-populations within the youth cohort Lynn Carter Kenya

13. Assessing Muslim Youth & Violent Extremism (VE) Risk in Northeast Kenya • Applied EDC EQUIP x-sectoral youth assessment framework and MSI youth & extremism module • Examined push, pull & protective factors for VE: • drew on findings in USAID’s Guide to the Drivers of Violent Extremism • Basic parameters: • $2 million for 2 years • 31,000 youth in Garissa district between 15 & 24 years of age

14. Importance of Targeting • Key Question: Which youth are most at risk of being drawn to VE groups? • If the program objective is developmental, then target neediest • If the program objective is counter-extremism, the neediest might not be the most at-risk • Targeting could be geographic, age group, clan/tribe, SES • At risk group in Garissa: • Town youth • Youth with more education • Males • Target Program response as well

15. Including Missions in project design workshop Ramon Balestino Eastern Caribbean and Kenya

16. Garissa Youth Project – G-Youth  USAID / Kenya Project Design Workshop Workshop Objective: To provide general guidance to the initial G-Youth project design. Workshop Agenda: 12:30 – 12:45 pm Introduction to Workshop & Methodology 12:45 – 1:45 pm Fieldwork Debrief: Preliminary Findings & Discussion 1:45 – 2:00 pm Break 2:00 – 2:20 pm Project Design Workshop: Presentation of Models 2:20 – 2:30 pm Clarifying Questions 2:30 – 3:10 pm Exercise: Break-out Groups (4 people) 3:15 – 3:55 pm Report-out: Group Recommendations 3:55 – 4:00 pm Next steps & Conclusion

17. G-Youth Project Parameters & Design Models

18. 6. Increased use of radio for youth-oriented learning & dialogue. 1. Enhanced NEP-Technical Training Institute (NEPTTI) 2. Established NGO Managed Youth Resource Center 3. Increased and improved NGO programs for youth 4. Increased access to career information in high schools 5. Strengthened & expanded youth groups 2. H.S grads; 3rd & 4th Form students, H.S dropouts; Primary dropouts 3. H.S. grads; H.S dropouts; Primary dropouts 4. 3rd & 4th Form students 5. Primary-secon-dary dropouts; H.S. grads; Never attended school 6. H.S. and post high school youth 1. H.S. grads; 3rd & 4th Form students 1. A. NEP Institute; B. NGOs; C. High schools; D. MOYA 2. A. NGO; B. NEP Technical; C. MOYA 3. A. NGO; B. High schools; C. NEP Technical; D. MOYA 4. A. High schools; B. MOE; C. NEP Institute; D. NGO; E.MOYA 5. A. MOYA; B. NGOs; C. High schools 6. A. Star FM; B. NGOs; C. MOYA; D. Private Sector 2. Career counseling; soft skills & ICT training; Youth services; recreation; Org. capacity; Marketing youth services; Host special programs 1. Marketing: vocational careers & NEPTTI; Linking grads to internships/jobs; Bursary; Org. capacity building 5. Marketing; micro- grants; Career counseling; Soft skills; Planning; Org capacity; Service learning 6. Call-in & issue programs; life skills; Career information; info about NGO & government resources 3. Marketing; Internships; Volunteering; Training; Career Counseling; Org. capacity building 4. Marketing; Career Counseling; Transition to tertiary education or labor force. 1. Sustainability; Viable career track; Skills for jobs 3. Local reputation; Knowledge of local environment (politics, youth, development needs) 4. Preventative approach; Receptive target group 5. Groups exist and are registered by MOYA; Number of youth served. 6. Very high reach in all Somali language areas 2. One stop shop for services; Youth space; Sustainable 1. Limited enrollment capacity; Limited labor market (Garissa); Limited target pop. 2. Mixed target group; Management; Start up; Establishment; Sustainability 3. Lack of capacity; Low funding base, Wide-ranging Strategic focus, Lack of impartiality; Sustainability 4. Limited targeted population (H.S. students); Limited activities; Sustainability 5. Diverse youth participants; un-focused groups; Not reaching unaffiliated youth; Giving preference to groups 6. Little impact in isolation from other program elements; Determining reach and impact 150-250 youth High Impact 500-1000 youth Moderate Impact 800-1000 youth Moderate Impact 1000-1500 youth Moderate Impact 1500-2000 youth Low Impact 10,000-15,000 youth Low Impact * Potential stand-alone models recommended by the rapid youth assessment team

19. Working with remote assessment teams Paul Sully Yemen and Somalia

20. Working with Remote Assessment Teams Yemen Team • Training • Field Work • Report Writing Somaliland Team

21. Training • codify and train- principles, criteria, problem-solving as well as specific skills and team building • Devote more time on training • truth check assumptions with team and test subjects

22. Field Work • use the telephone and skype early • daily notes review and feedback with corrections and suggestions • ask guiding questions • test “findings” assumptions

23. Report Writing • Engage select team members in report writing • interview field team members before and while writing • Contract remote specialists to write “stand alone pieces” • US-based content specialists, technical editor and copy editor

24. Identifying and building on the capacities of local youth-serving organizations Brenda Bell Rwanda

25. Who is working with youth around livelihoods and employment? Youth moving in large numbers from rural areas … … to urban centers, looking for work

26. Ways of identifying local youth-led and youth-serving NGOs: Interviewed NGOs working in 1) employment-related areas: • Youth employment policy • Job placement for youth by industry specific cooperatives or associations • Job creation for youth • Apprenticeship experience and issues • Vocational training components • Microfinance • Cooperatives 2) non-employment focus but with experience in: • Peace-building • Human rights promotion • Youth leadership development Recommendations from USAID Other donors and int’l NGOs Local NGOs Asking youth, through focus groups and interviews Looking for the ‘hidden’ youth – such as house girls Working through religious networks

27. Preliminary assessment of capacity • Program implementation experiences • Funding history • Structure and Staffing • Partnerships • Flexibility and adaptability

28. Selected Findings • Local NGOs not equipped to prepare youth for Rwanda’s changing labor market; they are under-resourced; lack capacity and infrastructure • Many are interested in developing capacity • Several are using creative means to create jobs or link youth to jobs. • All have considerable outreach capacity, with good relationships and trust with targeted youth

29. Assessing employment sectors for out-of-school youth David Rosen Bangladesh

30. Purpose Identify a sector or sub-sector of the economy that has: • Good growth potential • Employment demand, or opportunities for self-employment, for workers who may not have graduated from high school • Good opportunities for wage growth for participants who receive specialized training and education

31. Methods Identify and Interview: • Key players in the value chain for at least one sector to determine employment opportunities for school dropouts • Possible training and education providers • Groups of male and female school dropouts to determine their needs and interests in various employment and self employment opportunities

32. Activities Three-person team consisting of: • Training and education program designer • Private-sector expert • Local labor market expert • Interviewed representatives from nearly 40 organizations in two value chains • Conducted three focus groups (two all-male, one all-female) with rural school drop-outs

33. Three Major Findings • Farming fresh water prawns has great industry growth potential, and potential for rural self-employment with significantly increased earnings. • Lack of qualified prawn hatchery workers and technicians is the weakest link in the sub-sector value chain. There are good opportunities for school drop-outs who receive training. • Youth want to improve income-generating activities at home, not move to urban areas for low-wage jobs.